The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

Creationism, Evolution, and other science issues

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Diogenes
Guru
Posts: 1304
Joined: Sun May 24, 2020 12:53 pm
Location: Washington
Has thanked: 862 times
Been thanked: 1265 times

The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

Post #1

Post by Diogenes »

The proposition for debate is that when one takes the tales of Genesis literally, one becomes intellectually disabled, at least temporarily. Taking Genesis literally requires one to reject biology (which includes evolution) and other sciences in favor of 'magic.' Geology and radiometric dating have to be rejected since the Earth formed only about 6000 years ago, during the same week the Earth was made (in a single day).

Much of the debate in the topic of Science and Religion consists of theists who insist on a literal interpretation of Genesis rejecting basic science. Most of the resulting debates are not worth engaging in.
___________________________________

Before You Embark On A Journey Of Revenge, Dig Two Graves

— Confucius

User avatar
JoeyKnothead
Banned
Banned
Posts: 20879
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
Location: Here
Has thanked: 4093 times
Been thanked: 2572 times

Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

Post #631

Post by JoeyKnothead »

dad1 wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 3:15 am
JoeyKnothead wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 1:19 am ...
This whole "you can't prove it ain't" is among the most ignorant forms of debate I've ever encountered.
Let's not forget you can't prove it is either! Ha
Wow.

The OP's confirmed every time you post.

It's obvious all you wanna do is preach, so I'll leave you to your ignorance.
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin

dad1
Under Suspension
Posts: 449
Joined: Fri May 14, 2021 3:40 am
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

Post #632

Post by dad1 »

JoeyKnothead wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 3:34 am
dad1 wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 3:15 am
JoeyKnothead wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 1:19 am ...
This whole "you can't prove it ain't" is among the most ignorant forms of debate I've ever encountered.
Let's not forget you can't prove it is either! Ha
Wow.

The OP's confirmed every time you post.

It's obvious all you wanna do is preach, so I'll leave you to your ignorance.
It is true that science cannot deal with whether windows of heaven opened or not. It cannot confirm or deny. Talk about ignorant!!

I'll leave you to it.

User avatar
JoeyKnothead
Banned
Banned
Posts: 20879
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
Location: Here
Has thanked: 4093 times
Been thanked: 2572 times

Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

Post #633

Post by JoeyKnothead »

dad1 wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 3:53 am
JoeyKnothead wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 3:34 am
dad1 wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 3:15 am
JoeyKnothead wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 1:19 am ...
This whole "you can't prove it ain't" is among the most ignorant forms of debate I've ever encountered.
Let's not forget you can't prove it is either! Ha
Wow.

The OP's confirmed every time you post.

It's obvious all you wanna do is preach, so I'll leave you to your ignorance.
It is true that science cannot deal with whether windows of heaven opened or not. It cannot confirm or deny. Talk about ignorant!!

I'll leave you to it.
Ya can't prove it ain't! Ya can't prove it ain't! Ya can't prove it ain't!

Face it, if you could put truth to your claims you wouldn't have to keep railing against the inability of science to prove a negative.

I've heard more compelling arguments trying to get the dog to stay out of my sock drawer.
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin

dad1
Under Suspension
Posts: 449
Joined: Fri May 14, 2021 3:40 am
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

Post #634

Post by dad1 »

JoeyKnothead wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 4:34 am Ya can't prove it ain't! Ya can't prove it ain't! Ya can't prove it ain't!
I see you didn't leave after all. Let us ponder your new contribution then I guess. You seem to like slang words, is that the point? You like parroting? You take pride in posts that lack content? Maybe try to clear that up for us, tks.
Face it, if you could put truth to your claims you wouldn't have to keep railing against the inability of science to prove a negative.
The insinuation here seems to be that anything that is not strictly and religiously conformed to the beliefs of science on the origin of all things is 'not truth' Is that correct?
I've heard more compelling arguments trying to get the dog to stay out of my sock drawer.
Alrighty then. Long as we don't try to keep out dog spelled backwards, we may be OK. A possible solution to this scientific problem might be to do laundry properly so it doesn't smell? Keep us posted on the results. Tks.

User avatar
brunumb
Savant
Posts: 5993
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 6607 times
Been thanked: 3209 times

Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

Post #635

Post by brunumb »

dad1 wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 3:19 am You do not accept the bible or the scholarly attempts to get some idea of when the patriarchs lived. If it is in the bible it is verified!
Nonsense. The Bible is a book of claims. Nothing with any supernatural connotations has been verified. A lot of the allegedly historical records have not been verified. The Bible needs verification before it can be used to support any arguments based on what it contains. Applying faith is worthless. Faith is not a virtue. Faith can be used to prop up beliefs that are patently false along with those that are true. It is useless as a means of determining truth.
George Orwell:: “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.

User avatar
DrNoGods
Prodigy
Posts: 2716
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 2:18 pm
Location: Nevada
Has thanked: 593 times
Been thanked: 1642 times

Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

Post #636

Post by DrNoGods »

[Replying to dad1 in post #625]
Name any dating method that does not rest on a belief in a same nature in the past!? They ALL do!
There is zero evidence that nature behaved differently in the past, so it would make no sense to assume it did and then use this undefined and unquantified scenario to explain anything. But you really have no choice because the Geneiss stories are so outlandish and so easily proven false (ie. they cannot be taken literally) that any rational explanation does not exist. This leaves only the kind of fiction you are offering up with claims of nature being different and unknown in the past, windows to imaginary heavens, and all the rest of it.
If you have some point from a link, post it rather than posting a link to read. If you think you can support king list dating, go ahead! Been there done that. You will not succeed if you try.
I've never personally dated Egyptian kings so provided a link to a summary that others have done. If you're too lazy to read a few paragraphs that's on you. As brunumb pointed out, the biblical chronologies appear to be your basis for believing "creation" dates and global flood dates, which have far less legitimacy than Egyptian king chronology as those kings actually lived (unlike biblical characters like Adam, Noah, Abraham, etc. who never actually existed as real people).
In human affairs the sources of success are ever to be found in the fountains of quick resolve and swift stroke; and it seems to be a law, inflexible and inexorable, that he who will not risk cannot win.
John Paul Jones, 1779

The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.
Mark Twain

dad1
Under Suspension
Posts: 449
Joined: Fri May 14, 2021 3:40 am
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

Post #637

Post by dad1 »

brunumb wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 6:21 pm
dad1 wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 3:19 am You do not accept the bible or the scholarly attempts to get some idea of when the patriarchs lived. If it is in the bible it is verified!
Nonsense. The Bible is a book of claims. Nothing with any supernatural connotations has been verified. A lot of the allegedly historical records have not been verified. The Bible needs verification before it can be used to support any arguments based on what it contains. Applying faith is worthless. Faith is not a virtue. Faith can be used to prop up beliefs that are patently false along with those that are true. It is useless as a means of determining truth.
I disagree. Jesus said one thing and you say another. Overruled.

dad1
Under Suspension
Posts: 449
Joined: Fri May 14, 2021 3:40 am
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

Post #638

Post by dad1 »

DrNoGods wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 6:58 pm
There is zero evidence that nature behaved differently in the past,
There is zero evidence that nature was the same in the past

so it would make no sense to assume it
Since there is no evidence either way it is good not to assume it is one way as a science basis.
But you really have no choice because the Geneiss stories are so outlandish and so easily proven false
Except that you have proved nothing false and only made it clear that there are a plethora of things in Genesis that science could never ever cover.
This leaves only the kind of fiction you are offering up with claims of nature being different and unknown in the past
Since science does not know either way, you cannot call it fiction either way with any knowledge or evidence. We are left, in either case, with belief.
, windows to imaginary heavens, and all the rest of it.
You cannot declare heaven imaginary. Sorry. You have no possible way to test that or observe. You have only uninformed opinion. You are welcome to your opinion and beliefs, you are not welcome to pretend that they are anything else.
I've never personally dated Egyptian kings so provided a link to a summary that others have done.
I have seen this before. When someone looks a little into it, they back off, because they know where it is going to end.If you cannot grasp the issues enough to make a clear point or two and use a link as support for the points, then you are not capable of debating the issue.
If you're too lazy to read a few paragraphs that's on you.
Nothing to do with lazy. Been there done that, got the tee shirt. The Turin king list is particularly comical. Some unknown scribbler writes stuff on the backside of an actual document that is unrelated of course. For all we know he could have been an insane cook in Pharaoh's residence or etc etc. Then there is the issue that much of it is fragments that are missing! Then there is the issue that the early leaders cited were all spooks! (spirits) etc etc. No wonder some sites I looked at point out it is not reliable for dating. However, feel free to carry on:)
As brunumb pointed out, the biblical chronologies appear to be your basis for believing "creation" dates and global flood dates, which have far less legitimacy than Egyptian king chronology as those kings actually lived (unlike biblical characters like Adam, Noah, Abraham, etc. who never actually existed as real people).
If you actually think that, I have a nice bridge for sale real cheap.

User avatar
brunumb
Savant
Posts: 5993
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 6607 times
Been thanked: 3209 times

Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

Post #639

Post by brunumb »

dad1 wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 7:04 pm
brunumb wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 6:21 pm
dad1 wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 3:19 am You do not accept the bible or the scholarly attempts to get some idea of when the patriarchs lived. If it is in the bible it is verified!
Nonsense. The Bible is a book of claims. Nothing with any supernatural connotations has been verified. A lot of the allegedly historical records have not been verified. The Bible needs verification before it can be used to support any arguments based on what it contains. Applying faith is worthless. Faith is not a virtue. Faith can be used to prop up beliefs that are patently false along with those that are true. It is useless as a means of determining truth.
I disagree. Jesus said one thing and you say another. Overruled.
We don't know what Jesus actually said. All we have is hearsay. We can't even be sure that biblical Jesus even existed. You can believe it all until the cows come home but that doesn't make it true. If your indoctrination was into Hinduism instead of Christianity, you'd be saying the same things about Jesus.
George Orwell:: “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.

User avatar
JoeyKnothead
Banned
Banned
Posts: 20879
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
Location: Here
Has thanked: 4093 times
Been thanked: 2572 times

Re: The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

Post #640

Post by JoeyKnothead »

dad1 wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 2:19 pm
JoeyKnothead wrote: Sun Dec 04, 2022 4:34 am Ya can't prove it ain't! Ya can't prove it ain't! Ya can't prove it ain't!
I see you didn't leave after all. Let us ponder your new contribution then I guess. You seem to like slang words, is that the point?
I prefer slang words to theist lies.
You like parroting?
Never had one.
You take pride in posts that lack content?
That's kinda projection, coming from a theist.
Maybe try to clear that up for us, tks.
I do so by showing how theist claims're empty as the donation bucket at a thieves convention.
dad1 wrote: [/quote=JK]
Face it, if you could put truth to your claims you wouldn't have to keep railing against the inability of science to prove a negative.
The insinuation here seems to be that anything that is not strictly and religiously conformed to the beliefs of science on the origin of all things is 'not truth' Is that correct?
No. The insinuation is that if you could put truth to your claims you wouldn't hafta keep railing about how science can't help you put you no truth to your claims.
dad1 wrote:
JK wrote: I've heard more compelling arguments trying to get the dog to stay out of my sock drawer.
Alrighty then. Long as we don't try to keep out dog spelled backwards, we may be OK. A possible solution to this scientific problem might be to do laundry properly so it doesn't smell? Keep us posted on the results. Tks.
In what was does the smell of laundry help the theist prove their claims?
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin

Post Reply